【作者】 于海生；

【导师】 屈茂辉；

【作者基本信息】 黑龙江大学 ， 民商法学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 恶意诉讼是现代社会比较常见的一种社会现象。这一现象无论是在国内还是在国外都大量存在。从历史渊源上看,早在古罗马时期,就有对恶意起诉进行法律调整的相关规定。但是,在古罗马时期乃至近代以前这段历史时期,恶意诉讼并没有引起太多的关注。对恶意诉讼开始积极关注并在理论上加以研究,同时在立法上予以规定,则是近代以后的事情。我国学界对恶意诉讼进行研究是近几年才开始的。改革开放以来,市场经济不断发展,人们的利益意识不断强化。在追逐利益的过程中,很多人利用不正当手段获取非法利益。有些人甚至不惜以恶意诉讼为手段,侵害他人合法权益。现实社会经济条件决定了法律制度的构建和发展。大量发生的恶意诉讼案件要求理论界对恶意诉讼行为要给予应有的关注,在立法上要有相应规则对恶意诉讼加以调整。否则,恶意诉讼行为必然损害他人的合法权益,损害了社会公正,破坏社会经济秩序。本文即以这一认识为切入点,对恶意诉讼进行系统研究,在理论上廓清一些模糊认识,并在未来的立法设计上提出了自己的意见。就本篇论文总体情况来说,文章尽量避免基于民事程序法上的分析,而尽量从民事实体法角度切入,立足于中国侵权责任法理论基础,对恶意诉讼制度进行全面、系统的研究。值得一提的是,中国民法典立法过程中,立法者对恶意诉讼侵权责任制度也十分关注。无论是学者建议稿还是立法机关的草案稿,都对恶意诉讼侵权责任制度进行了规定,这无疑为本文的研究提供了立法基础,使得本文的研究更加务实而有意义。从论文的具体内容来看,全文一共分为六个部分,分别对恶意诉讼的基本概念、特征加以分析研究,在比较借鉴的基础上进一步分析恶意诉讼侵权责任构成要件,分析恶意诉讼侵权责任形式,最后探讨了我国恶意诉讼侵权责任法律制度的具体设计。具体来说：“绪论”中,主要安排了以下内容：首先是对论文选题的背景和研究意义进行了介绍。目前,各国法律领域对恶意诉讼侵权责任理论和制度方面都加以研究。不仅因为恶意诉讼的发生很普遍,对当事人合法权益构成威胁,而且它也浪费了国家的司法资源,并损害了司法权威。在中国,恶意诉讼的侵权责任问题,虽然以前没有作为理论的热点问题引起学界的足够重视,但这个问题的解决将有助于规制诉讼实践中日益增多的恶意诉讼现象,特别是我国目前的司法资源有限,如何更好的引导公民利用有限的司法资源进行良性的诉讼,合法利用诉讼程序,保护诉讼秩序对我们正在构建和谐社会将产生积极的作用。其次是对国内外研究的综述。整体而言,国际社会对恶意诉讼的研究比国内相比要进步得多。与以前相比,近十年来,学界对恶意诉讼相关理论的研究已经十分深入。但是,从侵权责任法的角度,对恶意诉讼行为进行系统性研究的成果还比较少,已有的成果也没有将理论和实践紧密的结合,对恶意诉讼侵权责任的本质特征、责任构成以及责任承担都没有深入探讨。正是因为上述因素的存在,笔者选取了这个题目作为本人博士论文选题,希望能够在本文中,在已有的研究成果基础上,将自己的研究心得系统整理,与大家交流探讨。在本部分中还简要介绍了该论文的体系框架、核心研究要点和主要的研究方法。第一章是关于恶意诉讼的比较法研究。论文主要对国外有关恶意诉讼的立法和学说进行梳理检讨。论文用比较研究的方法,在归纳总结恶意诉讼现有学说的基础上,通过比较分析展示了两大法系国家立法例中,各自在规范恶意诉讼的成果,并逐一进行比较,对其制度的不同特点进行了总结。论文还从国别的微观视角分析具有代表性的两大法系国家在界定恶意诉讼上的理论、立法例以及判例,在此基础上归纳不同法系国家在恶意诉讼法律调整方面的共性特征。第二章对恶意诉讼侵权责任的本质论的研究。在该部分中,主要研究恶意诉讼侵权责任的内涵、性质,并对恶意诉讼行为特征进行了探讨。首先,笔者对恶意诉讼的相关概念进行了考察,并进而给出了科学的定义。在文中,笔者还进一步给出了恶意诉讼侵权责任的判断标准。在分析我国界定恶意诉讼侵权责任的既有研究及存在的不足的前提下,进一步明确了恶意诉讼侵权责任的概念和本文的研究对象。笔者认为,恶意诉讼是指加害人故意起诉或者检举控告,使受害人限于不利司法境地,受到不利甚至不公正判决而遭致损失的诉讼行为。恶意诉讼侵权责任是侵权行为责任的一种类型,是指当事人因为故意引起恶意诉讼,给相对方造成损害应当承担的民事责任。论文还指出,我国学界对恶意诉讼侵权责任相关理论研究存在不足,理论上对恶意诉讼内涵的界定缺乏深入研究,也没有对恶意诉讼外延进行明明晰的确定,忽视了恶意诉讼内涵及外延的界定对这一侵权行为规制的理论意义。其次,论文论述了传统理论对恶意诉讼侵权行为性质的认识,并对之进行了相应的评述和分析。传统大陆法国家的立法和理论一般视恶意诉讼仅为一种妨碍诉讼行为。该种认定不利于保护受害人的合法权益,也不利于有效遏制恶意诉讼行为的发生。恶意诉讼行为的利益动机无非是试图得到非法的不正当的利益,只有剥夺恶意者所得的不正当的利益,才能有效地制止这种行为。最后,论文论述了恶意诉讼侵权责任与其他民事侵权责任的区别。本文认为,恶意诉讼行为不仅是一种公法上违反诉讼秩序的行为,而且是一种权利滥用并且侵犯了相关当事人合法利益的侵权行为。对恶意诉讼行为必须设置相应的规则对其加以调整。理由是,其一,恶意诉讼行为是恶意行为人对诉讼权利的滥用；其二,该恶意诉讼行为违反了任何人不得凭借法律取得一些非法利益的原则。其行为将会导致其他人利益的损害,使社会关系有失公平；其三,如果任由恶意诉讼行为的发生而不对受害人利益进行补偿,将违反矫正正义。在本部分的最后给出了对恶意诉讼行为进行法律调整的思路,并要求坚持“实体法与程序法并重”原则。第三章是关于恶意诉讼侵权行为构成要件的理论探讨。研究恶意诉讼的构成要件理论,既是恶意诉讼制度构建的理论前提,也是恶意诉讼责任实现的需要。合理设计恶意诉讼侵权责任的构成,既有理论上的意义,也有实践方面的意义。从理论方面来说,作为侵权责任法理论研究思维工具的侵权责任构成要件,它是加害人或者对损害负有赔偿义务的人承担责任的必要条件。侵权责任法对这些条件加以抽象、概括,进行一般化处理,形成了科学而系统化的构成要件理论。在侵权责任法法律演进过程中,人们认识到某些恒定的要素对侵权责任之构成起着支配作用。首先发现并被确认的这些恒定要素包括损害后果、因果关系和加害行为。而从实践方面来说,恶意诉讼侵权责任的构成要件,是行为人承担侵权责任的条件,是判断行为人是否应当担负侵权责任的标准。一般来说,在恶意诉讼中,在侵权损害事实发生之后,并不能仅仅根据结果对侵权行为人进行归责,而是必须依据一定的标准对恶意诉讼行为人的责任是否成立加以判断。否则,则难免陷入以结果来追究责任的客观归责的泥潭。恶意诉讼行为人在主观方面具有恶意,并在该意志支配下恶意起诉或者告发。这种恶意是更大程度的故意,它不仅要符合主观故意的一般条件,而且要符合一些特别条件,包括必须是直接地追求损害结果的发生,该行为人对于禁止性法律规定或者保护他人的法律规定漠视甚至公然违反。在该意志之下所产生的行为本身具有违法性,并对他人的权益造成了损害的结果。恶意诉讼的受害人一方受到的损害在很多案件中一般都比较复杂,具有复合性特征,即可能包括财产损失、精神损害或者其它正当权利之行使受影响。上述基本理论和实践方面的梳理,对恶意诉讼侵权责任构成要件理论的合理设计也具有重要意义。只有在上述理论的基础上,才能科学地建立恶意诉讼侵权责任的构成要件。恶意诉讼侵权责任制度也是关于致害人对因恶意诉讼侵权行为而受害的一方所遭受的损害承担责任的法律。恶意诉讼中的加害人对受害人一方遭受的损害承担法律责任,需要满足主观方面和客观方面的条件,以证明这种对他人之损害承担责任的公正合理性。恶意诉讼侵权责任是一种具有自身特征的侵权责任,它是对各种利益关系经过平衡考量后而加以设计的责任,因此具有很大伸缩性和不确定性。凭借侵权责任构成要件理论,能够将这种不确定性大大降低,从而使得恶意诉讼侵权责任制度设计更加合理、科学。第四章是对恶意诉讼侵权责任形式的探讨。该部分根据作者的研究成果,认为恶意诉讼侵权行为侵害的客体包括两种情形,一种是侵害诉权的情形,一种是侵害实体权利的情形,在两种不同的情形下,其责任的实现方式并不相同。第五章对中国侵权责任法立法中如何进行恶意诉讼侵权责任制度设计进行了探讨。在该部分中,论文首先论述了关于侵权责任一般条款和类型化设计的问题,接着探讨中国恶意诉讼侵权责任制度的构建,必须要有体系的把握和微观的细致考虑。本部分通过对现有各个侵权责任法学者建议稿和学者建议稿中的恶意诉讼侵权责任条款的分析,指出其不足,并提出自己的立法建议。笔者提出了我国恶意诉讼侵权行为立法规制模式的构想,即一般条款和类型化规定并举的模式。本文认为,应该特别对滥用程序性诉讼权利的侵权行为进行类型法定,并详细规定的每一种侵权行为的构成要件和责任形式,以平衡当事人双方的利益。论文结语部分对恶意诉讼侵权责任制度构建的利益平衡机制加以分析,并提出了中国《侵权责任法》未来完善的基本路径和目标。更多还原

【Abstract】 Malicious prosecution is a common phenomenon of the modern society. Whether in China or abroad,this phenomenon is ubiquitous. From the historical origins, there were the relevant legal rules on malicious prosecution during the Roman Times. But, in ancient Rome period and before the modern times, malicious prosecution did not cause too much attention. To put great attention and action in theory, and provisions on the legislation is provided since the modern times.Our study of malicious prosecution starts later, accurately begins in recent years. Since the reform and opening up, the market economic develop constantly, people’s interest consciousness continuously strengthened. Followed by unfair means for illegal benefits, even at malicious prosecution for means, infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of behavior has occurred. The reality of social and economic conditions decides the building and development of the legal system. Lots of the malicious cases require the theorists to pay some attention to the action of the malicious prosecution and should have the relevant rules for malicious prosecution. Otherwise, malicious actions will damage the lawful rights and interests of others, harms social justice, social and economic order.With this understanding as a starting point,there is a systematic research for the malicious prosecution, systematic research, in some of the theoretical expurgate vague understanding, and in the future legislation on design puts forward my opinions. This essay is overall situation, as far as possible avoiding the analysis based on the procedure law, but from the analysis of substantive law, based on the theory of tort liability law, litigation system for malicious comprehensively and systematically discussed. Moreover, China civil legislation process for malicious prosecution, lawmakers are also keen on tort liability system. Both scholars suggestion version and the draft legislature, all rule the tort liability system for malicious prosecution, this provides a legislation foundation for the paper’s research and make the study more pragmatic and meaningful.From the perspective of specific content,the paper is divided into six parts, analyzing and studying the basic concepts and features of the malicious prosecution,on the basis of comparative,further analyzing the constitutions of malicious prosecution tort liability,and analyzing the malicious prosecution tort liability form. Finally, discussing the specific design of our malicious prosecution tort liability legal system. Specifically:As to this "introduction", I have arranged the main content of this topic:firstly, I have introduced the background and significance of the research. As present, the law of each country has researched the theory and system of malicious prosecution tort responsibility. Not only because malicious prosecution does often happen, and it does a threat pose to legitimate rights and interests of the clients, but also wasted the country’s judicial resources, and damaged the judicial authority. In China, with respect to malicious prosecution of atort responsibility issues, although the academia has not pay enough attention to the hotspots as a theory before, solving the problem is helpful for regulating the increasing malicious prosecution phenomenon during the sue practice, especially the judicial resources in our country are limited at present, how to guide the citizens proceeding the benign litigation procedure with limited judicial resources preferable, utilizing the litigation procedure legally, protection of litigation order for the constructing harmonious society will produce positive effects. Secondly, I have reviewed the domestic and foreign research. Overall, the study of the international society of malicious prosecution is progressed than the domestic. Compared with the previous decades, in recent ten years, the academia has a deep research for the related theory of malicious prosecution. However, there are fewer achievements in systematic research about the malicious prosecution form the angle of tort liability law, and the existing achievements have not bond the theory with practice, moreover, it has not further research about the essential characteristics, the constitution of responsibility and the undertaking of responsibility about the malicious prosecution tort responsibility. Because of existing the above factors, the author choose this topic as my doctoral thesis, this paper will be based on the existing research and cleared up my study systematically, and I hope I can discuss with everyone happily. In this section, I have introduced the frame and system, the core points of research and the major research methods of this paper.The first chapter is about the comparative study of the malicious prosecution. Paper mainly analyze the legislation and theory on malicious prosecution. Using the method of comparison research, on the basis of summarizing the existing theory of malicious prosecution, through comparative analysis of the two countries show in their respective legislation regulating malicious prosecution, in one of the achievements, and compares its system, summarize the different characteristics. This paper also from microcosmic perspective analyze the representative two countries in defining the theory and legislation and case on malicious prosecution, on the basis of inducing the different countries’ common features in malice inductive legal adjustment.The second chapter defines the connotation of malicious prosecution tort liability. In this part, mainly research malicious prosecution tort liability’s connotation, characteristic,and discuss the feature of malicious prosecution action.First, the author of the malicious actions of related concepts were investigated, and thus give a scientific definition. In the article, the author also further gives determining criteria of malicious litigation tort liability.Definition of malicious actions tort liability on the analysis of existing research and under the premise of the shortcomings, and further defined the concept of malicious litigation and this infringement liability for research. The author believes that a malicious prosecution action is intentional the offender, the victim confined to adverse judicial position, or even get loss because the unjust verdict.Malicious tort litigation is a type of tort action is defined as intentionally caused malicious prosecution, cause damage to the opposite party shall bear civil liability. The paper also pointed out that the malicious actions on our academic theories of tort liability deficiencies, in theory, a malicious action on the connotation of a lack of in-depth study to define, and no extension of the malicious actions carried out to determine clear, ignoring the meaningful in theory that the definition of connotation and extension of malicious actions to this tort action regulation.Secondly, the paper discusses the traditional theories on the nature of malicious infringement litigation, and the conduct and analysis of the corresponding comments. Traditional civil law countries, legislation and the general theory of litigation is only a hindrance as malicious act litigation. The species identified are not conducive to the protection of legitimate rights and interests of victims, nor conducive to effective action to contain malicious behavior. Malicious motive is nothing but the interests of legal action is an improper attempt to obtain illegal benefits, only those from the improper deprivation of malicious interests can effectively stop this behavior.Finally, the paper discusses the difference between the tort of malicious litigation and other tort liability.This paper argues that malicious litigation actions not only violation a public law litigation disorderly behavior, but also a right to abuse and violation of the violations related to the legitimate interests of the parties. Act on malicious litigation must be set to adjust their rules accordingly. The reason is that firstly,acts of malicious legal action is malicious abuse of human rights on the proceedings;secondly,in violation of the malicious actions of any person shall by virtue of the law to achieve some illegal interest. Their behavior will lead to damage the interests of other people, so unfair social relations; Third, if allowed the occurrence of malicious legal action and not the interests of victims compensation, corrective justice would be violated. Finally in this section act on malicious litigation and the legal regulation of ideas, and requests "both substantive law and procedural law".The third chapter is about the malicious actions of tort factor in theory.Elements of theory of malicious litigation, construction litigation system is the theory of malicious premise and is the need of malicious prosecution responsibility to achieve.Rational design of the composition of malicious tort liability litigation,both theoretical significance and the significance of practice.From the theory side, as Tort Law Theory of Thinking Tools Elements of tort liability, it is the offender or the obligation of compensation for damages the person who bears responsibility for the necessary conditions.Tort Law for these conditions to be abstract, general,to-be vague and general to form a scientific and systematic Crime Theory. Tort law in the process of legal evolution, it was recognized that some constant elements of the tort liability of the composition plays a dominant role. First discovered and identified the consequences of these constant elements include damage, causation and harm behavior.From practice, the components of the malicious tort litigation is that tort liability is the condition of actor bearing and is to determine whether the act should bear tort liability standard.In general, malicious action, after the tort damage, it can not simply be based on the results of the violations were attributable to, but must be based on a certain standard to determine whether to establish responsibility of malicious people. Otherwise, the results are inevitably caught with the objective of accountability attribution quagmire. Malicious legal action in subjective is bad faith, and under the control of the will of a malicious prosecution or informant. This malicious is greater degree of intent,it is not only consistent with the subjective intent of the general conditions,but also to meet certain special conditions,including the need to pursue damage is directly the result of the occurrence of damage,the behavior violates the rules of prohibited or protected other people.Arising under the will of the act itself is unlawful, and damage the rights of others. Victims of malicious action by a party in many cases the damage is generally more complicated, with complex characteristics, which may include property damage, mental damage, or other legitimate exercise of the rights affected.The basic theory and practice of the sort of malicious tort litigation is also important to rational design of theory of malicious tort litigation elements.Only on the basis of the above theory can be scientifically established tort of malicious litigation Elements. Tort litigation system is malicious damage caused by people on the tort action for victims of a malicious party liable to the damage suffered by the law. Malicious actions on the victim side of the offender should be liable to damage suffered and need to meet the terms subjective and objective conditions to prove that the damage to others responsibility of fair and reasonable. Malicious tort litigation is a tort that has its own characteristics, it is through the balance of various interests and to be designed after consideration of the responsibility, so it has great flexibility and uncertainty. Elements with tort theory are able to greatly reduce this uncertainty, allowing a malicious tort litigation system to design more rational and scientific.Chapter four is about the form of malicious tort litigation. According the results of research, the object of hostile action against violations include two cases, one is against the right to appeal the case, the other is revising substantive rights, in two different cases, the realization of their responsibilities is different.Chapter five discuss how malicious tort litigation system be designed in legislation of tort law in China. In this section, the paper first discusses the general provisions of tort liability and types of design problems, then the construction of China’s malicious actions tort liability system, and the system must be carefully considered and the microscopic. This part analyses the existing tort law in various draft and scholars have suggested that the proposed draft in terms of malicious prosecution tort liability and points out the disadvantages and put forward their own legislative proposals.I made my legislation model of malicious tort litigation is that the type of general terms and provisions of the model simultaneously.This paper argues that give the type statutory to the abuse of procedural rights, and detailed in each of the constitution and the liability form of the tort action in order to balance the interests of both parties.Conclusion part of the paper analyze the balance of the interest to the construction of malicious prosecution tort responsibility system and put forward the future basic path and goals of China "Tort Liability Act."更多还原